Posted on 05/17/2006 9:19:50 PM PDT by AllmanBrosFan
Sun Microsystems plans to offer support for the Ubuntu server Linux distribution on its T1 server line, the company said at the JavaOne industry conference in San Francisco.
"We will be aggressively supporting the fork that Ubuntu has been doing," Sun chief executive Jonathan Schwartz said at the conference. "The ideals of that community are relatively familiar to us."
The Ubuntu Linux distribution is based on Debian. The operating system currently provides only a desktop version that has a strong following among software developers. A first server system is scheduled for release on 1 June.
The distribution is sponsored by Canonical, which offers commercial support for the application.
Sun's T1 servers use the company's Niagara multi-core processor. The systems were launched last December and are currently certified for Solaris only.
Sun's support is a major win for Ubuntu as it aspires to become one of the world's main Linux distributions.
Its creators seek to differentiate the offering from Red Hat and SuSE by providing support as an optional service for a limited number of systems, rather than bundling support automatically with the software.
Sun hopes that supporting the operating system will expose its hardware to a new group of users. A company spokesman denied that the support was aimed as a move against Red Hat and SuSE.
I still laugh whenever I see that...laughing at the term and any stooge who uses it seriously.
I want to start a copycentrist movement!!
I explicitly stated that ssh/ssl and the database were kept current. If you got the impression that the sysadmins never patched anything, it is because you were not paying attention.
You are correct that the kernel was not patched after the initial installation, but then it was not necessary or useful either. There were no bug or security fixes that affected us in that environment. In fact, I had to lay down the law on a sysadmin who wanted to apply irrelevant kernel patches to that particular machine so that it would be "current". You do not monkey with mission-critical servers with huge file systems without a damn good reason, and it was a 24x7 box so downtime for any reason (and therefore risking downtime) is ipso facto bad.
uh oh. Now you're introducing a new concept here.... :)
LOL now he's denying patches are even useful. *nix admins always think they're so smart when it comes to security, when in reality they have little practical experience in dealing with actual threats. You need "development" if not "test" systems to check patch compatibility before applying it to your "production" systems. If you had any experience in facing actual threats you might know some of this, but instead you're obviously just counting on being hidden or an undesirable target, a very poor assumption to make in today's world.
We have an old Sun box here running a pretty old version of Solaris. It's been running for years, perfectly, so there hasn't been a real need to upgrade. Going to denigrate us for using an old version?
It seems you've swallowed the Microsoft "You have to buy the latest" profit-making line.
I wasn't talking about desktop environments. I was specifically talking about the compiler. But if you're on UNIX you've probably used gzip or a utility that runs gzip in the background. "gzip" means GNU Zip, meaning it's Stallman's.
That must be you. You didn't even know about a network mapping tool that, while useful to admins, is also a major tool used in attempted network intrusions. Any comprehensive up to date book on the subject mentions it. The DoD mentions it in its security training materials.
Basic fact: You know SQUAT about network security if you've never heard of it even after all the hints I gave you.
You lost all credibility on this subject long ago.
Only idiots don't patch their servers after patches for them come out. But you're even dumber if you run sytems on the network after the vendor stops providing patches at all. What did you think, the hackers quit looking for holes the day the vendor stopped patching? Hilarious, since you guys typically claim being open is somehow more secure, but you've been relying on obscurity as your only protection! LMAO, not that I'm surprised!
No, I refused to join in on your praise of Russian hackers, which you're still trying to twist around to somehow smear me LOL. Damn you guys are funny, running servers without patches while praising Russian hackers. You better hope the Russian hackers don't find your unpatched servers. Wait, actually they may have already, since they specialize in not leaving any trace, while you bozos brag about the uptime of your unpatched systems LMAO.
Just remember...
When Iggle calls someone a criminal or a hacker, it's right.
When you tell him he's full of crap, it's a smear.
typical tactic of someone who has NOTHING else to add or a position to stand on.
LOL here comes the dude with the "Jim Rome Ping List" to try to get in a few cheap shots since he isn't capable of even entering the actual discussion. Have a take and don't suck. Too late LOL.
LOL the Jim Rome worship is all we really know about you, since you're not ever capable of actually entering these discussions. The one time you claimed you were a network admin, you let it slip you don't even know the password to "your" network. LMAO!
How useful is a sendmail patch on a windows exchange server? its about as useful as a kernel patch which addresses a kernel module or feature which is not on your system
You need "development" if not "test" systems to check patch compatibility before applying it to your "production" systems.
Funny I have not seen anything out of him that indicates he does not believe in a test and dev environment. But if you think stating the obvious (and putting it into quotes to boot) will impress anyone here your seriously deluded. If you want to act like you're anything but a PHB or an admin want to be you should have listed UAT, QA, Staging, and Integration, for mc applications with a healthy development life cycle.
But at least Mike has something to stand on--unlike you.
BTW--Although he's the best sports radio personality IMO, Jim Rome has absolutely nothing to do with the tech threads
Finally, you still didn't answer my question--did Gates up your quota?
LOL
keep going iggle...
you know you are the laughing stock of FR. If you don't you should know it. Because you are.
I click on these threads for the entertainment purposes alone. And to figure out what you are trying to do, so I can do the EXACT opposite.......
He said he didn't apply kernel patches, yet you defend him. LMAO!
You still miss the point--while the kernel wasn't patched right away, the patches were irrelevant.
The fact is that there's the principle of primus non nocere--above all, do no harm.
Rather than putting patches on that could screw with the system, it makes more sense to hold off and only put what's necessary. Those kernel patches might have made the system current, but were they really necessary? That's the point.
This clearly shows you have not one iota of knowledge regarding *nix systems--after all, even I can figure this out, and technically, I'm still rather largely inexperienced with it.
LOL, coming from the college kid majoring in political science! This is hysterical, but getting rather boring since the ignorance on display here appears to be permanent. You guys just keep skipping all your kernel patches, and running systems no longer even supported by the vendor, and telling everyone how smart you are! LMAO!
Gold Eagle Out
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.